Benjamin Franklin's "The Autobiography"

Although Benjamin Franklin's autobiography was not as entertaining as Rousseau's autobiography, I think perhaps it was easier to read when compared to Augustine's "Confessions." Franklin does not seem to be concerned about religion, much less the focus of his story as is seen in Augustine's autobiography. Similar to Rousseau, Franklin gives his readers a more chronological account of his life beginning with his birth and describing his background. His background and boyhood are a part of his own development. Franklin was more concerned about his own thoughts and his self-education.

In Sidonie Smith and Julia Watson's chapter on "Life Narrative in Historical Perspective," they mention that Franklin's autobiography was not published until much later in mid-nineteenth century. They go on to say that, "Franklin's autobiography becomes a prototypical narrative for America's myth of the self-made man and the entrepreneurial republican subject, specifically marked as male, white, propertied, and socially and politically enfranchised" (98). This leaves me wondering who Franklin had in mind as his readers when he wrote his autobiography. Rousseau felt he needed to defend himself, his character, and even became a bit threatening at the end. We do not get the same feeling from Franklin's story. He seems to describe himself as the self-educated, self-made man. This would make sense for Franklin's story to become an example of the ideal American man. However, this happened much later. What were Franklin's true intentions and who was his intended audience while he was writing his autobiography?

Screening of "Daughter Rite" by Michelle Citron

While watching "Daughter Rite" I was confused as to whose autobiography was being told. Does this film fit into the autobiography genre that we have discussed? There was a narrator who talked as if reading diary entries, and the narrator spoke of an "I" with the juxtaposition of old home videos made of two daughters with their mother. However, there was also the story of two sisters interacting and sharing stories/making discoveries about their mother. At the end of the film, it mentioned that the two actresses were "role playing" these two sisters. For me there is confusion about how the ongoing story of the two sisters relates to the diary-entry-like narrations. The one clear relation is the mother-daughter relationship and how daughters have a fear that they will be like their mothers - for good or for bad. As a viewer, it did not seem that the narrator, the author, and the protagonist were the same "I" and consequently, is it possible to consider this autobiography? Can it be autobiographical? If so, whose story is this?

St. Augustine's "Confessions" and Jean-Jacques Rousseau's "Confessions"

St. Augustine's Confessions was autobiographical in a very different way that Rousseau's Confessions were autobiographical. St. Augustine's accounts all relate and lead up to his conversion and to the event in which he realizes that he can no longer live in a sinful state. Throughout his story his relation to God remains the most important and central idea. We as readers must read in between the lines at some points to figure out what is going on in Augustine's life. His conversion is the screen through which we view Augustine's life.

Rousseau's autobiography is completely different. He addresses his readers at the beginning and states his purpose in writing his Confessions. There is a sort of chronology that he follows (for the most part) beginning with his birth and boyhood and into adulthood. Interestingly, though, he jumps back in time in order to support a story he has already told. We, as readers, get a clearer understanding of Rousseau's story as well as his personality (compared to Augustine's story). Consequently, it is easier to view Rousseau's story as autobiography, even though in both Confessions, the author is also the protagonist and the narrator. It is also clear from their different styles that they were written for different purposes and with different readers in mind.

Paul John Eakin's "Registers of Self"

Although Eakin stated he was going to go about studying the "self" or "selves" relating to identity in an anthropological way, his methodologies were based more in psychology. For Eakin uses four autobiographies (in addition to Madame I) to show how identity is influenced with there is a disconnect between the body and self. This is an approach often used in a psychology experiments or studies. Psychologists often study what is "abnormal" in order to gain a better understanding of the brain and how it works.

An idea that I kept coming back to in my reading of this chapter was the notion of change. According to "neural Darwinism" the brain's neural organization is constantly modified. Psychologists have studied this. For instance, when someone is blind, their sensory perception becomes reorganized. The area in their brains used for sight often diminishes so that the area devoted to touch perception increases. This allows a blind person to rely more upon their sense of touch. However, one does not need to be blind in order for the brain to reorganize itself. If the brain is constantly reorganizing itself, then we ourselves are constantly changing. Our bodies and our concept of self (selves) then are also constantly changing.

Does this mean, then that our narratives constantly change? Do we remember things differently? If our concept of self (selves) is rooted in our body and body image, then even without that break between body and self (the abnormal examples) our would bodies influence our autobiographical narratives and experiences. Perhaps we are just not as aware of this when there does not seem to be a break between body and self.

Ross McElwee's "Sherman's March"

Viewers of McElwee's "Sherman's March" might be confused about the film based solely on the beginning with a brief historical introduction of Sherman. After a few moments, McElwee takes over the narration and the rest of the film is about him with bits and pieces of Sherman throughout. While McElwee mostly stayed in the South, more or less tracing Sherman's march through South Carolina, North Carolina, and Georgia, Sherman did not seem to be his driving force. The film became an autobiographical story about McElwee who was on a mission of his own. We, as viewers, followed McElwee as he traveled from place to place, from one woman to another. Women became his driving force. There were moments during the film that made me feel uncomfortable - he was a bit creepy sometimes. Perhaps that has to do more with my own identity and sense of self in relation to the person McElwee was portraying on the screen. While McElwee was filming his own adventures through the South, perhaps he was identifying with Sherman by creating his own parallel journey.

Lejeune's "The Autobiographical Pact"

Lejeune's definition of autobiography is in terms of text and seems a bit limited. It is interesting that he excludes memoirs, journal/diary, and the self-portrait or essay. These seem to me to have autobiographical value. The reason for a diary to be excluded is because it is not written with a retrospective point of view of the narrative. What? Writing a diary usually records the events of someone's life after they happened. If someone records the events of the day, they necessarily happened before the writing occurred. While Lejeune addresses the exclusion of poetry in "The Autobiographical Pact (bis)" in addition to some of the weaknesses of his Autobiographical Pact, I felt that there was more that needed to be addressed.

The other issue that I had with Lejeune was his identity of the author. He stated that an autobiography written by an author using a pseudonym could still be considered an autobiography. However, later he states that the author and the narrator share the same name. Other issues of identity occur when the author is unknown. Lejeune decides that an unidentified author combined with an unnamed protagonist cannot be autobiography. I do not think that we can necessarily exclude that possibility, although it would be difficult or impossible to determine whether it was truly an autobiography.

One last issue I had was when Lejeune stated that the difference between biography and autobiography, "lies in the rather paradoxical fact that this accuracy has no essential importance" (22). This is different from Bruss who wrote about the importance of the truth-value. Perhaps I am misreading this or misunderstanding Lejeune. However, I think that capturing a person's life events with accuracy would influence the integrity of the autobiography.

Lab September 11, 2007

Justin Hall's video was an autobiographical impulse explosion. It seemed as though he had no real impulse control when telling his story. Telling his story and expressing his feelings exemplified the limits of the internet. There is only so much interaction one can have with one's computer and the camera. Yes, capture his story on the webcam, but he must call a friend in order to have an actual conversation with someone. Perhaps this is why he is feeling so desperate.

I also wanted to make a comment about Rebecca Blood's weblog article. I personally have a tough time keeping my blogs short. Yet, I think that this has to do with my inexperience and in knowing exactly what to say. Rebecca Blood touched on this in her lengthy article. While reading it, I felt as though I need some more experience in blogging in order to hone my blogging skills and to be more selective in my writing.

Smith and Watson, "Autobiographical Acts"

Smith and Watson introduce Ken Plummer's idea about autobiographical stories involving three different kinds of people who contribute to the autobiography: The narrator, the coaxer, and the consumers or readers. They take his idea further to suggest there are many different groups involved. Coaxers, according to Plummer, is a person or institution that provokes people to tell their stories (50). Some coaxers can be more coercive than collaborative. This is important to keep in mind when examining an autobiography - how much of the story is the narrator's? How much has been deleted or changed based on the preferences of the coaxer?

Just as there are multiple types of coaxers, there are various sites of storytelling that are multilayered matrices (mostly personal, institutional, or geographical). There are four different autobiographical "I"s: The historical "I," the narrating "I," the narrated "I," and the ideological "I." The boundaries of an "I" is often shifting and flexible. It is based upon relationality to others or to the Other, and as one can imagine, there are multiple others.

There are a variety of methods that narrators use to tell their stories, and "the emplotment of autobiographical narratives can be described as a dense and multilayered intersection of the temporal and geographic" (74). Finally, consumers of autobiographies are varied and heterogeneous. This idea that the autobiography is a varied and multilayered genre is reinforced with almost each different aspect of the autobiography the authors address.

Perhaps this is not completely new to our study of the autobiography; however, I like that they remind their readers that it is important to be critical and mindful of the different dimensions involved in the genre of autobiography. Because autobiography is such a complex genre this becomes a difficult task when it is not always clear which "I" we are reading/seeing, when the chronology is fractured, when parts of the story have been cut out, and so on. The audience also changes over time and location, and the meaning can change. I think Plummer sums up this idea when he says, "always and everywhere the meanings of stories shift and sway in the contexts to which they are linked" (80).

Michael Renov, "The End of Autobiography or New Beginnings?..."

Renov introduces the article by mentioning Elizabeth Bruss' argument about the subtle disappearance of the genre of autobiography. It is clear that his argument is in response to Bruss' canonical article. I agree with Renov that both Benjamin and Bruss acknowledge the change that occurs moving from literature (and painting) to film (and photography), but it is Bruss who is unable to see the positive side.

Renov uses mostly the internet and personal web pages to communicate his argument. With the invention of the internet and the advancements of web pages, there is actually an increased interest in sharing autobiographical information. More and more people are interested in creating their own web pages - blogs, myspace, facebook, etc - to communicate information about themselves. Written words are still used, but are enhanced with pictures, photographs, sound (music), videos, and a variety of other media. The creator of a web page is the author, the narrator, and the protagonist of his/her own page. Other people become involved when they interact with someone's web page. Perhaps with others responding to a person's web page, this provides another view point of the person's ongoing autobiography.

Technological advancements have altered the ways that people are able to participate in the autobiographical impulse. Not everyone must write an autobiography in book form (however some still do), and autobiography is more accessible to people through the internet. Therefore, as Renov suggests, the genre of autobiography has actually been reborn and not extinguished. It is different from Bruss' understanding of the autobiography; however, with changes in technology and in our culture, so too must the genre of autobiography change.

Screening 9/4/07: Sadie Benning and Fatimah Tobing Rony

Sadie Benning: Sometimes Benning uses written words to communicate ideas whether it is about her neighbors, her friends, or herself. She poses questions. The videos also seem to function as Benning's confessions - confessions about herself, such as admitting to skipping school, kissing boys, kissing girls. She uses a lot of close up shots, mostly of her face to include herself into the video. Is she filming herself? That would mean that she is both filming and being filmed at the same time (sorry Bruss). Benning enhances her autobiographical videos with a certain amount of shock value. Yet, there is also some humor and insight involved. I liked Benning's quote: When you are alone, you know yourself for you and not because you are with someone (paraphrase).

Fatimah Tobing Rony: Her film, On Cannibalism, is an interesting critique on the social sciences and their practices of collecting and "displaying" subjects from other cultures. While Rony focuses on her mother's ancestry, does this mean that the film is "autobiographical"? It is not an autobiography, but because her mother's ancestry is a part of her own, is this enough to make it "autobiographical"?

Bruss, "Eye for I: Making and Unmaking Autobiography in Film"

Bruss introduces the idea that with advancements in technology such as film there has been a subtle disappearance of the genre of autobiography. It seems that we cannot leave Benjamin behind, for he is the one who acknowledged the changes that came along with the shift from literature and painting to photography and cinema. Bruss focuses specifically on the genre of autobiography and compares literature and film as media. She focuses on several ideas. One of them is that in film, there is an almost always mutually exclusive relationship between the person filmed and the person being filmed. This is problematic as it relates to autobiography.

In literature, the author who writes about himself/herself is writing about "I" and there is no real mediation between the person and his/her words. However, in film, one is not able to film himself/herself while also playing himself/herself, so there is mediation. There are multiple people involved: the director, the producer, and the actor or actress are only a few mentioned. Bruss believes that the only way that film could produce a real autobiography would be if the auteur were to be the actor and the director, to be the person filmed and the person filming (which is clearly an impossibility). Even then, many other elements could come into play that influences the autobiography.

While Bruss brings up many good points, I think Benjamin's idea of the camera introducing viewers to the unconscious optics has some validity here. While film may not portray a person in a truly autobiographical way (as Bruss defines the genre), what if the film version of autobiography brings us to a deeper understanding of the person? What is more important? Perhaps with film we are developing a new form of autobiography.